GP at Hand costs could ‘jeopardise’ other health services if not mitigated

The costs associated with the Babylon GP at Hand practice could ‘jeopardise' other health services if not mitigated, according to the CCG which hosts the online GP service.

NHS Hammersmith and Fulham CCG said the 'exceptional' growth in the digital-first GP service list has led to increasing costs, which if not resolved could threaten other health and care services in the area.

Babylon GP at Hand also puts a 'significant administrative burden' on the CCG, the latest board papers said.

In response, Babylon - which currently has 40,000 patients registered with its NHS service - said 'any discussion around the need to accommodate a growing practice' is a matter for NHS England to 'resolve'.

At the time, NHS England assured the CCG the costs would be 'mitigated fully'.

But in the latest board papers, published today, Hammersmith and Fulham CCG said: 'The exceptional list size growth associated with the Babylon GP at Hand practice has resulted in increasing costs flowing to the CCG.

'Should the mitigation not materialise there will be a material worsening of the financial position of the CCG, potentially jeopardising other health and care services in Hammersmith and Fulham.'

A Babylon GP at hand spokesperson said: 'The needs of patients have to be put first which is why we have seen the list grow so quickly over the past year.

'Babylon GP at Hand receives no extended hours funding as a result of its growing list size, nor indeed any rent reimbursement for its clinics outside the CCG.

'Therefore any discussion around the need to accommodate a growing practice in the area is a matter for NHS England to resolve in line with the assurances they previously gave the CCG all in the interest of patient choice.'

The CCG is currently in talks with NHS England on how and when Babylon GP at Hand costs will be recovered.

(1) ‘’A Babylon GP at hand spokesperson said: 'The needs of patients have to be put first which is why we have seen the list grow so quickly over the past year.’’
Cunning .
Cannot think of any word other than ‘populism’ . Manipulating populism disregarding the pre-existing deficiency of resources in general practice, is irresponsible, deceitful and despicable.
(2) It remains Cherry Picking because one would know logically, those pregnant and elderly patients will always prefer to prefer a GP practice near home . Common sense .My argument is CCGs should pay these private providers a much less rate for registering these out of area patients. So , let them Peanut Picking , by all means .
(3) The health secretary needs to declare conflict of interest by any standard , especially after he openly declared himself a patient of GP at Hand . This is indirectly, advertising a NHS GP practice? Somebody, please check if any legislation has been broken.

The Swedish system of individual risk based capitation fees would resolve this as well funding issues around the housebound, those in nursing homes and ‘patient drift’ of complex patients from poorly performing practices to their neighbours.